Simply put:
User: user
Organization: Unknow
2009/4/28, Robert Riebisch :
> Michael Robinson wrote:
>
>> I could also complain that Microsoft ...
>> ... doesn't have a right
>> to sue people over it.
>
> Could you please explain this strange POV?
>
>> MS-DOS to my knowledge never asked for an inst
Michael Robinson wrote:
> I could also complain that Microsoft ...
> ... doesn't have a right
> to sue people over it.
Could you please explain this strange POV?
> MS-DOS to my knowledge never asked for an installation code
> and it is not marked in any way as copy XYZ.
That's correct, but it
> > MS-DOS and Windows 3.x are clearly abandonware. If I want to
> > use this abandonware, am I suddenly breaking the law?
>
> Not suddenly. It is and was breaking the law. Of course you can
> hope that MS is too busy hunting people who steal Vista, but
> you cannot just say that stealing MS DOS
Hi Michael,
> How about games made for the Tandy Color Computer 3 by Diecom Products?
> That company is now defunct and has been for a very long time. You
> can download disk images of Guantlet II. Is that really illegal?
As the company is defunct, it is unlikely that they will sue you.
But ma
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Robinson [mailto:plu...@robinson-west.com]
> Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2009 1:48 AM
> To: freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Freedos-user] Abandonware site...
>
> > But just to say the last word about this
>> On a side note, I could care less whether or not people use illegal
>> copies of software on FreeDOS; that's a personal choice. But don't
>> try to force your opinion on other people.
>
> You mean the way you are trying to force your opinion on everyone?
No I am not. I am saying "everyone, ma
On Apr 19, 2009, at 1:34 AM, Michael Robinson wrote:
> Anything from the 90's or earlier qualifies as ancient
> software. In the software world, anything that is 3 years old
> can be considered ancient. Commercial DOS software hasn't been
> supported since the 90's.
This statement is patently
> Use without author's permission is not legal, selling without author's
> permission is not legal (unless your local law allows otherwise), and
> making a profit of something gets you in court quite fast indeed.
>
> Bernd
>
The GPL is an exception, it gives you permission to use the software
Copyright and abandon stuff are separate issues.
It's certainly possible that software is abandon, and that nobody will
come after you for using it.
That does *not* however, mean the copyright on that software has been
invalidated. If the copyright holder (whoever that may be) decided to
enf
Michael Robinson schreef:
> Speaking of abandonware, all the Nintendo games for the original
> 8 bit system fit that description now. Should anyone distribute
>
what is the definition of abandonware anyway? and why would it be legal
if it did fit the description? to my knowledge Nintendo is u
On Sat, 2009-04-18 at 22:59 -0700, Blair Campbell wrote:
> > Downloading commercial software that you own a copy of for personal
> > use is not illegal. Downloading old commercial software that isn't
> > sold anymore which the author doesn't care about is not illegal.
> > To be illegal, the owner
Michael Robinson schreef:
> Downloading commercial software that you own a copy of for personal
> use is not illegal. Downloading old commercial software that isn't
>
I'm not even sure this is allowed. A lot of software was distributed on
physical media, of which you were allowed to make a c
Speaking of abandonware, all the Nintendo games for the original
8 bit system fit that description now. Should anyone distribute
an emulator to run the old games on PC's? Should anyone distribute
instructions on how to get a rom image of an old game so a person
can play it on his/her PC? Would
> Downloading commercial software that you own a copy of for personal
> use is not illegal. Downloading old commercial software that isn't
> sold anymore which the author doesn't care about is not illegal.
> To be illegal, the owner of the intellectual property has to raise
> suit and why would th
> But just to say the last word about this thread: please avoid warez,
> sources and links to any other illegal activities.
>
> Thanks.
> Aitor
Downloading commercial software that you own a copy of for personal
use is not illegal. Downloading old commercial software that isn't
sold anymore wh
Hello,
2009/4/13 Michael Robinson :
> know of. Technically, if the author of a proprietary program
> doesn't care about it anymore, sharing it isn't a legal problem.
That is plain wrong. Many old games are back-to-life thanks to mobile
phones, and it just evidences that the authors keep the copy
On Sun, 2009-04-12 at 20:13 -0500, Jim Hall wrote:
> > If you own a computer that had MS-DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1
> > on it at one point, but your install media are fried, try
> > this abandonware site.
> >
> > http://vetusware.com
> >
> > I worry about the legality of downloading from this site,
> If you own a computer that had MS-DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1
> on it at one point, but your install media are fried, try
> this abandonware site.
>
> http://vetusware.com
>
> I worry about the legality of downloading from this site, but
> technically the software they are allowing people to downloa
"If you own a computer that had MS-DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1
on it at one point, but your install media are fried, try this
abandonware site."
Regardless of the age of the product and the ownership, if one has the
orig
media there shouldn't be a problem.
At least thats what I think, :)
usul
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009, Michael Robinson wrote:
> If you own a computer that had MS-DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1
> on it at one point, but your install media are fried, try
> this abandonware site.
>
> http://vetusware.com
>
> I worry about the legality of downloading from this site, but
> technically th
20 matches
Mail list logo
